Monday , January 18 2021

Scott Morrison suffers from historic defeat as a border guard election tissue



"Votes will come and they will go, they don't scare me," he said.

"Where we will always stand and the Australian people can always rely on us to do is have the metal to ensure the integrity of our border protection framework."

The government struck the "shameful" steps of the work to pass the bill in the light of legal advice that the changes violated the Constitution, which in turn led to warnings that the coalition's ability to hold power was in danger.

Sir. Morrison warned of the changes allegedly humanitarian but would encourage people to smuggle and risk more maritime deaths from asylum seekers alike.

The government is preparing to raise its attack on Work by announcing "emergency measures" to counteract boat arrivals, with an option being reopening the detention center on Christmas Island.

Sir. Shorten dismissed the government's demands and stated that Labor would maintain national security but still treat people humanly.

Loading

"The government tells us that this bill is a constitutional crisis. In fact, this bill is about treating sick people," he told Parliament.

"We can have strong boundaries while still fulfilling our duty of care for those people in our care.

"This bill and our amendments are about Australia's character. It's about how we treat sick people in our care."

The final vote, shortly after. Thursday, 6 pm, delivered a fantastic victory for Labor, Greener and crossbench MPs to enforce new rules to give doctors more to say about refugees moving from Manus Island and Nauru to treatment in Australia.

The bill will be put to the vote in the Senate Wednesday, where the government does not seem to have the numbers to stop the new regime being allowed.

The work made a strategic move to avoid making the bill a test of confidence in the government and withdrawing part of the medical transfer scheme that required funding to pay for medical experts to undergo transfers.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison before losing the vote on Tuesday night.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison before losing the vote on Tuesday night. Credit:Alex Ellinghausen

The move interrupted a terrible debate about whether the vote in the lower house could be seen as a vote on a letter of money and therefore was a confidence in the government itself.

Constitutional expert Anne Twomey, a legal professor at the University of Sydney, said that the decision to reduce the cost of the medical panel changed the consequences of the loss in parliament.

"Now that it's no longer a money letter, and as the government did not declare it to be a matter of trust, the government can continue to govern," she said.

"If the lower house really lost confidence in the government, it could always move a movement of confidence, but so far it hasn't."

Professor Twomey said a parallel to the government's losses in the Parliament had fallen in the Fadden government in 1941 when the budget was changed to reduce it by the nominal sum of one pound.

Another parallel was the fall of President-in-Office Stanley Bruce in 1929 when he went to elections after the introduction of a work-related bill and lost a key vote of 35 to 34.

Mr. The Shorten showed the government's vulnerability by getting the support of five independent and a Greenlandic partner to get 75 votes on the floor of the Board of Representatives to comply with the new rules for refugee medical transfers.

Loading

In a surprise legal twist just hours before the vote, the government quoted legal advice from lawyer general to argue the bill would incur additional expenses by setting up a panel of medical experts to manage refugee transfers.

This launched an argument over Section 53 of the Constitution, which states that the Senate "must not change any proposed law to increase any proposed fee or burden for the people" and led to Labor removing the cost of the medical panel aside. threat.

Section 53 is "unjust" and therefore a court will not decide whether a law is valid, which means that the government cannot challenge the transfer bill in the High Court.

The work had its 69 members as well as the support of Green Member Adam Bandt and independent Julia Banks, Cathy McGowan, Kerryn Phelps, Rebekha Sharkie and Andrew Wilkie.

Loading

"I know how much people who are sick at Manus Island and Nauru are suffering and Parliament is probably saying enough," Phelps said after the vote.

This 75-block was enough to pass the bill over the 73 government votes and another vote from Queensland-independent Bob Catter.

Sir. Shorten secured the votes after justifying his original crossbench proposal.

In the form passed by the lower house, the bill says that the Immigration Minister must make decisions about each transfer within 72 hours, unless refugees are to be rejected for security reasons.

The security grounds have also been clarified. In the first version of his position, the Minister of Labor suggested that the Minister could reject transfers if the refugee had a "substantial criminal record" under a provision of the Migration Act covering all crimes covered by prison terms of more than one year.

The later version of the draft proposal applies to the same part of the Migration Act, but adds the condition that the Minister "should reasonably believe that the person will expose Australian society to a serious risk of criminal behavior".

This amendment aims to protect refugees who need medical attention but may have been convicted of minor offenses or perhaps crimes of freedom of expression in their home countries.

Interior Minister Peter Dutton and Immigration Minister David Coleman began working on contingency plans Tuesday night in a meeting with Interior Secretary Mike Pezzullo and Australian Border Commissioner Michael Outram.

David Crowe is the Chief Political Correspondent of the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

Mostly seen in politics

Loading


Source link